Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Too Clever by Half

epsilontheory.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 261 posts

Re: Too Clever by Half

#101

Post by pavel_lishin »

haZard_OS wrote: post #88
dpark wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPA has no impact on your final degree in the US either. You complete the same coursework and get the same degree as the person with a perfect GPA. The only real exception is if you’re screwing up so bad that they kick you out, in which case you don’t get the degree because you don’t complete the coursework.

On a number of occasions I have had prospective employers ask what my final grade was for specific classes. I have never been asked about my GPA specifically, but my grades at the University certainly affected me beyond academia.

May I ask which classes, and what type of employer? I don't even know if any of my employers bothered verifying that I graduated college.

Re: Too Clever by Half

#102

Post by baxtr »

vpontis wrote: post #14

I really enjoyed this article. Summary Coyotes are too clever because they know that people shaking jars full of coins can’t hurt them. Thus the animal control patrol has to get called and when they don’t shoo, the animal control person who loves animals has to shoot the coyote. Coyotes are winning the mini-game of each human interaction, but they are losing the meta-game of what society will do if coyotes aren’t sca…

The question for me is the definition of “winning”. In his perspective animals like sheep are “winning” the meta game because they behave. However, becoming dumbed down just to survive is maybe not much of a “win” either.

Re: Too Clever by Half

#103

Post by megaman22 »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #22

>> When the dog gets close to the wire, the receiver starts to beep, and when the dog gets all the way to the “fence” boundary, the receiver generates a small electric zap. I know, I know … it’s negative reinforcement and it’s a shock collar and all that. Don’t care. It’s fantastic for us and our dogs. That's disgusting.

It's less disgusting than seeing your poor dog smashed to hamburg by a pulp truck in the road, or put down by animal control because it wandered off and got antagonized.

Re: Too Clever by Half

#104

Post by pavel_lishin »

gnode wrote: post #85
hangonhn wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the biggest winner in the meta-game is the coyote’s domesticated cousin: the dog. They are the darlings of the human world. If earth was imploding and we had to leave for another inhabitable planet, I bet there would be a few dogs and cats aboard those spaceships. Not so sure there would be room for coyotes. Caring for dogs is now a many billion dollars industry and growing. Dogs might be dumber than coyotes but…

This makes me question what is should mean to "win" in a genetic sense. The dog may be high in number, but its genetic selection has been artificial, controlled by humans selecting for favourable traits. Similarly, could we consider the cow to be successful, having been bred to produce enough milk that it can't stand, yet with a population much higher than before humans?

I'm not sure about whether dogs or cows are successful, but their genes surely are.

Re: Too Clever by Half

#105

Post by r_singh »

etherael wrote: post #90
r_singh wrote: post #59

The most relevant take away from this article (for me) is how the coyotes (crypto and currency experts) invented Bitcoins, raccoons over leveraged it out of dumb greed (investors) and the state took notice and acted out of sheer desperation to not lose control and once again rendered the invention useless by gaining more control than before (the part that is currently in its early stages right now). Update: I think t…

They don't have control though. At best, they sabotaged just the bitcoin core blockchain, and those who were in it to destroy the state and central banks forked off into bitcoin cash. They also provoked a tidal wave of "financial innovation" in the sector with now dozens of independent blockchains, some utterly anonymous, over which they have zero control. If their campaign was the bring this under their power, it ca…

I agree with the essence of your comment that the efforts of the state to suppress cryptocurrencies (to prevent themselves from losing control) are a miserable failure.

However, the same is not true in the developing world where a number of countries have outright banned all independent cryptocurrencies and will be launching state controlled cryptocurrencies soon. Seems like they don't care much about anyone (coyotes, sheep or raccoons).

Re: Too Clever by Half

#106

Post by ItsMe000001 »

golergka wrote: post #45
ItsMe000001 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in hopes that they can integrate with us I think you can stop right there. The dog thing happened not because dog "wanted" to be with humans. Dogs were clueless about what happened, it just did. The explanation is on a higher level, not in their desires, not even in the desires of the humans who participated in most of the dog domestication (even if some of them may have thought about it, but by then it was already…

How can you talk about these things with such a high degree of certainty? I've read different theories about dog domestication. All of them have some strong and some weak points. All of them don't have enough evidence to be taken as the only source of truth.

> How can you talk about these things with such a high degree of certainty?

Because "in hopes that they can integrate with us" is just silly.

Of course, I admit that I take for granted that I don't have to justify a believe in evolution.

If you entertain the possibility it was a deliberate human act it would have required an effort like the Fox breeding experiment in Russia. They would have had to go out and catch wild wolves and breed them for generations - that seems extremely far-fetched. Much more likely that there already were wolves that had gotten used to humans, which means they had already changed. Which is what I said:

> even if some of them may have thought about it, but by then it was already happening

It sure is likely that humans at some point thought it useful, but the domestication started not because anybody in particular wanted it to happen.

By the way, I think horse domestication is (was) probably different. It's easy to see how wolves benefit from leftovers found near humans, but horses just need grass. Horses also still don't depend on humans nearly as much as dogs do.

Re: Too Clever by Half

#108

Post by ptero »

nazca wrote: post #4

The only issue with his metaphor is that coyotes have been doing very well at the meta game. At the time of European contact there were no coyotes anywhere near Connecticut. Lewis and Clark didn't encounter them until they hit the great plains. Actually only a few decades ago there were no coyotes near the eastern US. But coyotes are clever and they've learned to adapt and live in close proximity to humans. And as we…

I think that coyotes are doing well as species, not necessarily as individuals. I suspect this is the framework of the post as well, but it should have been more explicit.

Non-domesticated technology/industry/world changing innovators ("coyotes") will exist in any modern society and will still change the world. But an average young coyote cub could still be very miserable.

Re: Too Clever by Half

#109

Post by Isamu »

baxtr wrote: post #102
vpontis wrote: post #14

I really enjoyed this article. Summary Coyotes are too clever because they know that people shaking jars full of coins can’t hurt them. Thus the animal control patrol has to get called and when they don’t shoo, the animal control person who loves animals has to shoot the coyote. Coyotes are winning the mini-game of each human interaction, but they are losing the meta-game of what society will do if coyotes aren’t sca…

The question for me is the definition of “winning”. In his perspective animals like sheep are “winning” the meta game because they behave. However, becoming dumbed down just to survive is maybe not much of a “win” either.

> dumbed down

Hey now, I'd like to speak up for the sheep. Maybe a bit introverted but not dumb. In my experience they are quite opinionated and willful.

Ok maybe I am projecting a bit.

Re: Too Clever by Half

#110

Post by ItsMe000001 »

tzahola wrote: post #41
ItsMe000001 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in hopes that they can integrate with us I think you can stop right there. The dog thing happened not because dog "wanted" to be with humans. Dogs were clueless about what happened, it just did. The explanation is on a higher level, not in their desires, not even in the desires of the humans who participated in most of the dog domestication (even if some of them may have thought about it, but by then it was already…

>not even in the desires of the humans who participated in most of the dog domestication [citation needed]

If you want to claim they caught wild wolves and started a breeding program like what was done with the famous Russian foxes then it is you need to bring a citation.

The outrageous claim that needs citations is that the wolves had "hopes that they can integrate with us".

Post reply on HN